Which version of 1917 do you recommend (4 replies and 3 comments)
Hi Mr Deakins,
For Blade Runner 2049 you mentioned that you preferred the 2.40 : 1 version of it as opposed to the IMAX version. Is that still the case with 1917 or do you feel 1917 is best experienced in the IMAX format
I like the Dolby 2.40 version the best but the IMAX is interesting.
Everytime I see a movie in IMAX I walk out with ringing ears, seems a little over the top in terms of volume level.
I saw it on a system that is advertised as 4K Laser Ultra. Both image and audio quality have noticeably improved. Black is really black, not quite pitch black yet, but surely getting excitingly close. The whites were brighter but not bright enough to sting my eyes. When the opening shot appeared, it was as if I was almost really there. As if the screen was a literal window into another dimension. I also did notice a difference in resolution. I like to sit close to the screen, maybe that's why I noticed it? I also noticed a lack of chromatic aberration of the projection lens. I remember seeing BR2049 and it had some noticeable colour fringes in that very same theater.
The sound quality was so good that I could actually start to "hear the room". This particular theater is pretty well designed in terms of acoustic dampening but it was the first time that I could really distinguish the sound of the room from the sound from the speakers. The low end was very smooth, effortless but also heavy when it needed to be. The stereo and surround image was very good also. I think it's also due to the craftsmanship of the artists, but damn, the sound localisation was pretty much bang on with the visual sense of space.
I have to honestly say that this has been the best projection experience I've ever had. I didn't expect it, was pleasantly surprised and highly recommend it.
So in my country they adverse it as 4K Laser Ultra. Not sure which system it is but perhaps there is something similar in your country!
Roger, when that flare is shot and the camera rotates about 45° around the characters in order to get the flare in shot behind them...
I remember anticipating the flare appearing from above into the frame and thinking: "oh dear, the sky is already so bright, will we be able to see the flare?"
And to my astonishment, yes, the flare stands out pretty damn well.
Is this something you had to tweak in post? And is there a difference between the different formats? Is that flare still clearly visible on a generic 2K (non-laser) system? Or did I just just misjudge the brightness of the sky in the first place?
I realise it's pretty stupid to think about something like that, but I can't help it 🙂
But don't take it too personally, it's not your fault 😀
My guess would be the flare is CGI so they had one less precise framing and timing mechanic on set, so it would be its own element to adjust the brightness of in post. Flares in real life are extremely bright though and would certainly show up on a cloudy day.
Really! The flare is a CG element and it was balanced to the brightness of the sky. The sky was bright but is was overcast and there was plenty of brightness left. It is all relative!
There should be no difference in the various formats as we spent time in matching them all. However, nothing is perfect! Well, maybe, 'Ivan' Childhood' is perfect and 'Army of Shadows', but we are human.